Cite as 2015 Ark. 73
the rationales for the class-action mechanism is to provide individual consumers with an effective way to pool resources and collectively bring a claim that would otherwise be unremunerative if brought individually. Most consumers throw their receipts away on their way out the door; so a receipt requirement would undermine the class-action mechanism because so few class members could produce receipts from cigarette purchases made years ago.
VI. Conclusion
We hold that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in certifying this class. We therefore affirm the circuit court's certification order.
Affirmed.
HART, J., dissents.
Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates & Woodyard, P.L.L.C., by: R.T. Beard, III; and Arnold & Porter LLP, by: Lisa S. Blatt, John C. Massaro, and David E. Kouba, for appellants.
Thrash Law Firm, P.A., by: Thomas P. Thrash and Marcus Neil Bozeman; Don Barrett, P.A., by: John W. "Don" Barrett and Brian K. Herrington; and Barnow & Associates, P.C., by: Ben Barrow and Erich Schork, for appellees.
Brian G. Brooks, Attorney at Law, PLLC, by: Brian G. Brooks, for amicus curiae Arkansas Trial Lawyers Association.
Kitterman Law Firm, P.A., by: Gregory S. Kitterman; and Elliott & Smith Law Firm, by: Don R. Elliott, Jr., for amici curiae Tobacco-Free Kids, American Lung Association, and American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network.
Kutak Rock LLP, by: Jess Askew III, for amicus curiae Arkansas State Chamber of Commerce.
17
